Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24780294›Full record

ArticleClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2014

Variability in assessing treatment response: metastatic colorectal cancer as a paradigm.

Binsheng Zhao, Shing M Lee, Hyun-Ju Lee, Yongqiang Tan, Jing Qi, Thorsten Persigehl, David P Mozley, Lawrence H Schwartz

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Enhanced Detection of Treatment Effects on Metastatic Colorectal Cancer with Volumetric CT Measurements for Tumor Burden Growth Rate Evaluation.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Binsheng ZhaoAuthors' Affiliations: Department of Radiology, Columbia University Medical Center; bz2166@cumc.columbia.edu.
Shing M LeeMailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York; and.
Hyun-Ju LeeAuthors' Affiliations: Department of Radiology, Columbia University Medical Center;
Yongqiang TanAuthors' Affiliations: Department of Radiology, Columbia University Medical Center;
Jing QiAuthors' Affiliations: Department of Radiology, Columbia University Medical Center;
Thorsten PersigehlAuthors' Affiliations: Department of Radiology, Columbia University Medical Center;
David P MozleyDepartment of Imaging, Merck Research Laboratory, West Point, Pennsylvania.
Lawrence H SchwartzAuthors' Affiliations: Department of Radiology, Columbia University Medical Center;
Columbia University Irving Medical Center · USColumbia University · USUnited States Military Academy · US

Funding

Quantitative Volume and Density Response Assessment: Sarcoma and HCC as a ModelU01CA140207 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI SCHWARTZ, LAWRENCE H, ZHAO, BINSHENG · 2011 to 2015
$2.8M
Studying measurement variability in tumor volume and volume change on MDCTR01CA149490 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI ZHAO, BINSHENG · 2011 to 2016
$1.7M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA149490NCI NIH HHS U01 CA140207
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe cutoff values currently used to categorize tumor response to therapy are neither biologically based nor tailored for measurement reproducibility with contemporary imaging modalities. Sources and magnitudes of discordance in response assessment in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are unknown. EXPERIMENTAL

designA subset of patients' CT images of chest, abdomen, and pelvis were randomly chosen from a multicenter clinical trial evaluating insulin-like growth factor receptor type 1-targeted therapy in mCRC. Using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), three radiologists selected target lesions and measured "uni" (maximal diameter), "bi" (product of maximal diameter and maximal perpendicular diameter), and "vol" (volume) on baseline and 6-week posttherapy scans in the following ways: (i) each radiologist independently selected and measured target lesions and (ii) one radiologist's target lesions were blindly remeasured by the others. Variability in relative change of tumor measurements was analyzed using linear mixed effects models.

resultsThree radiologists independently selected 138, 101, and 146 metastatic target lesions in the liver, lungs, lymph nodes, and other organs (e.g., peritoneal cavity) in 29 patients. Of 198 target lesions total, 33% were selected by all three, 28% by two, and 39% by one radiologist. With independent selection, the variability in relative change of tumor measurements was 11% (uni), 19% (bi), and 22% (vol), respectively. When measuring the same lesions, the corresponding numbers were 8%, 14%, and 12%.

conclusionsThe relatively low variability in change of mCRC measurements suggests that response criteria could be modified to allow more accurate and sensitive CT assessment of anticancer therapy efficacy.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm StagingReproducibility of ResultsTomography, X-Ray ComputedTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID24780294
PMCPMC4337392
OpenAlexW2100129334

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.